The initial cause was noble, to protect pilgrims. Along the way that goal got lost though.
The initial cause was noble, to protect pilgrims. Along the way that goal got lost though.
They weren't portrayed as pure evil in assassin's creed, play the game before making assumptions
- oh and yes, the movie is inaccurate. I'll put it in the words of my professor of Medieval Studies at the U of M, "I am the blacksmith...Does anyone ever wonder how a blacksmith can, with just a half-hour training session with his dying father, rise to lead an army against one of the more brilliant commanders of his time? Anyone?"
AND fire!? Lolz!!!!
P.S. But still, it was pretty entertaining, I agree. I just wish the German at the beginning of the movie wasn't killed so quickly...that part made me want to go see the movie. Friggen crazy Germans.
I felt like destroying the crusader states as Egypt after watching the Kingdom of Heaven.
Bite me.
I finished Assasin's creed. Actually the entire templar stuff in that game is rediculous. They have muslim templars.
That's because the Templars in AC are not Crusaders, they don't care if you are European or Saracen - they see everyone as equally human.
No but film said that he was trained soldier.extended version.Specialised in making sige weapon.Than he was trained in sword and horses and dad just show him some moves he actualy did know to fight.Some people just fit in this kind of situations.Lots of training actualy don't produce briliant comanders jou have to have natural talent for that (like Hanibal -in my opinion best battle strategist ever ).Also he was educated - he can read. He was in wars before and know how they work.So he had backgruound.Also this is movie and they put effort to reproduce history not like classical hollywood movie (Rambo type with sword).Good effort.There is lots of mistakes but overall fantastic movie.At the other hand I was watching Rome (BBC) serial - wau that was great and (BBC) Hanibal (actualy it was documentary but it looks like movie).Now I watch most this kind of BBC projects others films (especialy hollywood) are full of **** for my taste.
"Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great compassion. Your delight is not in horses, nor Your pleasure in warriors strength..."
Aha, "Platonic Love", I heard... Spartans should have been _at least_ bisexual...
P.S. Just read about the term Spartan Pederasty... Ugly.
Last edited by Echad; January 16, 2008 at 08:43 PM.
Any other movies similar to Kingdom of Heaven? Thanks.
I have King Arthur (2004) but haven't had a chance to watch all of it yet...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Arthur_(film)
I saw this movie a looooong time ago on cable and want a copy; a really well done siege battle..
"The story is about a minor knight defending a dreary castle on the fringes of Normandy. The costumes are realistic and the dirt, grime and poverty of the period are shown without any of the usual Hollywood gloss..... there is plenty of action, including a siege of the castle by barbaric Frisians."
I have same movie but it is from 2007 with mongols I think (Sample video is all I have seen so far)
There's a recent Russian film called MONGOLS..about warring factions in the east, it doesn't cover their western campaigns, but some good battle scenes; very authentic uniforms and equipment.
You watched it? It just hags on my HDD, have no time to watch it, but 'll do if it's any good.
I have to say that Kingdom of Heaven is one of my favorite movies. It may not be completely accurate, but atleast it could be worse.... Just take a look at the movie The Pathfinder.... I want to whack those people with a frying pan. It was also one of the very few movies my history Prof recommends in his courses.
I don't think all the Templars were being portrayed as evil, there were others outside of Jerusalem. I think that the movie was trying to show the extremists that were preventing any lasting peace in the middle-east. Christianity was generally more violent back then than it is now. Just as Islam is going through a similar cycle of violence today.
Last edited by TheSoulforged; January 17, 2008 at 07:49 AM.
Well nothing as inaccurate as the Holy Grail.
Exept all the stuff about the french.
That one is very realistic compared to Monthy Python's Holy Grail actually.
Well, AFAIK Monthy Python's was made for fun, while 300 was trying to be historic... King of Sparta, listening to his wife's advices and not ****ing (site will censor it out - read "making love with") the small boys is even worse that Holy Hand Grenade... And Orcs and Gollum in Ancient World... =\ Whew, no, I'll better go and watch the Mummy again... And I think the Holy Grail wasn't about politics and the Iran is bad, but Spartan pedophilic faggots are good, because they have Democracy! Well, if Democracy means that some Democrats will decide on to throw my children from rock, or not, I'll prefer Monarchy to it any time. And cutting my hair short is one of the worst outcomes of it. =)
P.S. From Wiki:
300's director Zack Snyder stated in an MTV interview that "The events are 90 percent accurate."
WoW! I know now - there were Orcs and Gollum, Xerxes was bald and had no bodyguards. The historians are lying! It's a Jewish conspiracy!